Sambandam Senthil Nathan, Ramasamy Vijayaraj, Priyanka Priyanka, Ilango Balakrishnan
Wrightington Hospital, Wigan, England.
Arthroscopy. 2007 May;23(5):509-513.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2006.12.007.
This study was designed to ascertain the quality of patient information available on the World Wide Web on the topic of knee arthroscopy.
For the purpose of quality analysis, we used a pool of 232 search results obtained from 7 different search engines. We used a modified assessment questionnaire to assess the quality of these Web sites. This questionnaire was developed based on similar studies evaluating Web site quality and includes items on illustrations, accessibility, availability, accountability, and content of the Web site. We also compared results obtained with different search engines and tried to establish the best possible search strategy to attain the most relevant, authentic, and adequate information with minimum time consumption. For this purpose, we first compared 100 search results from the single most commonly used search engine (AltaVista) with the pooled sample containing 20 search results from each of the 7 different search engines. The search engines used were metasearch (Copernic and Mamma), general search (Google, AltaVista, and Yahoo), and health topic-related search engines (MedHunt and Healthfinder). The phrase "knee arthroscopy" was used as the search terminology.
Excluding the repetitions, there were 117 Web sites available for quality analysis. These sites were analyzed for accessibility, relevance, authenticity, adequacy, and accountability by use of a specially designed questionnaire. Our analysis showed that most of the sites providing patient information on knee arthroscopy contained outdated information, were inadequate, and were not accountable. Only 16 sites were found to be providing reasonably good patient information and hence can be recommended to patients. Understandably, most of these sites were from nonprofit organizations and educational institutions. Furthermore, our study revealed that using multiple search engines increases patients' chances of obtaining more relevant information rather than using a single search engine.
Our study shows the difficulties encountered by patients in obtaining information regarding knee arthroscopy and highlights the duty of knee surgeons in helping patients to identify the relevant and authentic information in the most efficient manner from the World Wide Web.
This study highlights the importance of the role of orthopaedic surgeons in helping their patients to identify the best possible information on the World Wide Web.
本研究旨在确定万维网上有关膝关节镜检查主题的患者信息质量。
为进行质量分析,我们使用了从7个不同搜索引擎获得的232条搜索结果。我们使用一份经过修改的评估问卷来评估这些网站的质量。该问卷是基于评估网站质量的类似研究制定的,包括有关网站插图、可访问性、可用性、问责性和内容的项目。我们还比较了不同搜索引擎获得的结果,并试图建立最佳搜索策略,以用最少的时间获取最相关、最真实和足够的信息。为此,我们首先将最常用的单个搜索引擎(AltaVista)的100条搜索结果与包含来自7个不同搜索引擎中每个搜索引擎的20条搜索结果的汇总样本进行比较。所使用的搜索引擎包括元搜索引擎(Copernic和Mamma)、通用搜索引擎(谷歌、AltaVista和雅虎)以及与健康主题相关的搜索引擎(MedHunt和Healthfinder)。搜索词使用的是“膝关节镜检查”。
排除重复项后,有117个网站可供进行质量分析。通过使用专门设计的问卷对这些网站的可访问性、相关性、真实性、充分性和问责性进行了分析。我们的分析表明,大多数提供膝关节镜检查患者信息的网站包含过时信息、内容不足且缺乏问责性。仅发现16个网站提供质量尚可的患者信息,因此可以推荐给患者。可以理解的是,这些网站大多来自非营利组织和教育机构。此外,我们的研究表明,使用多个搜索引擎会增加患者获得更相关信息的机会,而不是使用单个搜索引擎。
我们的研究表明患者在获取有关膝关节镜检查的信息时遇到的困难,并强调膝关节外科医生有责任帮助患者以最有效的方式从万维网上识别相关且真实的信息。
本研究突出了骨科医生在帮助患者在万维网上识别最佳信息方面的重要作用。